Perkins v. Byrnes’s Empirical Analysis
1954
Citation profile
11 federal appellate · 24 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 37 later decisions — most recently April 2011 · most notably Orthmann v. Apple River Campground, Inc. (1985), Thomas J. Jones, a Single Man v. Halekulani Hotel, Inc., a Hawaiian Corporation, John Doe and the Xyz Corp., a Corporation (1977)
11 federal appellate · 24 state decisions
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
Relationships
Relies on Murphy v. Steeplechase Amusement Co. · Hughes v. St. Louis National League Baseball Club, Inc. · Sherman County v. Ross · Hudson v. Kansas City Baseball Club, Inc. · Waddel's Administrator v. Brashear
Most-quoted passages
The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 37 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“accept[s] ... those [hazards] that reasonably inhere in the sport so far as they are obvious and usually incident to the game.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“a swollen river with a hidden or deceptive undercurrent is a circumstance upon which reasonable minds could differ.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“It is true that Big River is a natural stream, or, as the defendants say, “a public stream,” and they could not control its depth or current. But the rules prescribing the duty of care and requiring the proprietor of a place of public amusement to make the known dangerous condition safe or to give a warning adequate to enable his patron to avoid the ham applies to “a natural or artificial condition thereon.” [Citation omitted.] The proprietor or landowner may enclose his land adjacent to a natural stream, and his is the election to determine whether the public is to be excluded or accorded the status of invitees. [Citations omitted.] Once he has made the election and appropriated a part of a public body of water to the uses of his private venture the general rules have been applied to such divergent bodies of water as Lake Ontario, Great Salt Lake, Lake Washington, Lake Pocotopany in Connecticut, Barren River in Kentucky, St. Joseph’s River in Indiana, and even to the tidal waters of an am of the sea. [Citations omitted.]”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Dunbar v. Burns
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.